Western Digital VelociRaptor: A Drive with a Bite
by Gary Key on April 22, 2008 4:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Storage
Let's get real now
We need to state once again that the press sample drives shipped with early firmware that is about 90% complete according to Western Digital. Their engineering group is working around the clock (we were up together until the wee hours last night) to finalize the firmware before the drives ship to Alienware or into the retail channel.
Western Digital was upfront about the state of the firmware and warned us that results might not represent the final product. We already discussed the firmware problems yesterday. In our case, it appears that besides being firmware challenged our drive might not have been the smartest or most capable of the pack either. We have returned our drive for analysis. In the meantime, our actual application results consist of benchmarks that certainly would expose the sustained transfer rate problems on the outer area of the platters.
Game Level Load
This test centers on the actual loading of a playable level within our game selections. Our application timer begins when the level load process is initiated and ends when the screen is visible.
In Company of Heroes, the separation between the mechanical drives is just over a second. Our VelociRaptor is the quickest mechanical drive in this test. In Crysis, we see the VelociRaptor trailing our leaders by just .2 seconds at most. These are objective tests centered on a single level load in each game. Subjectively, the two Raptors and our SSD drive seemed to offer quicker transitions' between levels as we extended the game play length.
Nero Recode
Our encoding test is quite easy - we take our original Office Space DVD and use AnyDVD to copy the full DVD to the hard drive without compression, thus providing an almost exact duplicate of the DVD. We then fire up Nero Recode 2, select our Office Space copy on the hard drive, and perform a shrink operation to allow the entire movie along with extras to fit on a single 4.5GB DVD disc. We leave all options on their defaults except we turn off the advanced analysis option. The scores reported include the full encoding process in seconds, with lower numbers indicating better performance. We delete each image after use.
We had a slight surprise in this test as the original Raptor finishes about two seconds ahead of our star. It was obvious watching the encode process that the VelociRaptor's time stumbled and stalled at the beginning of the test and then the drive made up ground quickly that allowed it to almost catch our previous mechanical champ. The Mtron SSD drive once again flexes its muscles.
WinRAR 3.71
Our WinRAR test measures the time it takes to compress our test folder that contains 444 files, 10 folders, and 602MB of data. While the benchmark is CPU intensive for the compression tests, it still requires a fast storage system to keep pace with the CPU. A drive that offers excellent write performance can make a difference in this benchmark.
This test relies on the CPU and the burst rate of the storage system. Our VelociRaptor finishes in third this time and trails the Samsung 750GB and WD 640GB offerings. Once again, at the beginning of the test the drive stumbled out of the gate and then finished strong.
31 Comments
View All Comments
DeepThought86 - Thursday, April 24, 2008 - link
Why oh why do you people insist on using new benchmarks all the time? How stupid is it that I can't go to your review of the Seagate 500GB from just last year and be able to compare performance with this new Velociraptor.Zak - Sunday, April 27, 2008 - link
Hm, so I guess this is not going to fit in a Mac Pro due to non-standard connector position. I bet there will be 3rd party replacements, but will this void the warranty?Z,
mvrx - Thursday, April 24, 2008 - link
I still find it strange that a drive only has 32MB of cache.. I'd think a gig or two would be on some high end drives..Xean - Wednesday, April 23, 2008 - link
Is it suitable for laptops?strikeback03 - Wednesday, April 23, 2008 - link
As they mentioned, only ones that accept unusually tall 2.5 inch drives.Fricardo - Tuesday, April 22, 2008 - link
What happened to the hard drive review article that was supposed to come out a month or so ago? I'd really like to see a full comparison, especially of the new WD and Samsung drives.Deusfaux - Tuesday, April 22, 2008 - link
#1. Tech Report says:"Western Digital says it's also working on a single-platter version of the drive, but that's not ready yet."
Gary can you verify this one way or another? What would the timeframe be?
#2. I have a couple spike drops when I bench one of my 2 Raptors with HDTach/HDTune. They're not right at the start, but they're there all the same.
What do they mean? I don't have them on my other Raptor.
Araemo - Tuesday, April 22, 2008 - link
Haven't all raptors(and indeed, most 10k and 15k rpm drives) used 2.5" platters in their large casings? I thought that most/all high-end drive manufacturers used 2.5" platters due to the high angular velocities and vibration.In that case - the smaller drive size shouldn't have any negative impact on performance at all.
GhandiInstinct - Tuesday, April 22, 2008 - link
In 2008, for their next generation Raptor, only 16MB Cache?CK804 - Monday, April 28, 2008 - link
Do people read anymore? The explanation is given on the second page:While the hot option on the latest 750GB~1TB drives is a 32MB buffer, WD is once again staying the course with a highly optimized 16MB cache. WD states they did not see any advantages to a 32MB cache on this drive and instead spent their engineering resources on optimizing the cache algorithms.